EvidenceProf Blog

Editor: Colin Miller
Univ. of South Carolina School of Law

Friday, July 12, 2019

Carolina Academic Press Releases Expert Evidence by Andrew Jurs

Carolina Academic Press has released Expert Evidence by Andrew Jurs.

Screen Shot 2019-07-12 at 7.53.12 AM

Expert evidence serves as the highly contextual core of litigation, and this textbook has been designed to bring a practice-oriented lens to the issue. The book begins with materials breaking down the central rules of evidence and civil procedure constraining presentation of experts, then moves into application of those rules to various common disciplines in criminal and civil litigation.

Throughout the book, students will engage with real-world writing exercises to apply the rules in context, to sharpen analytical skills, and to prepare for their transition to practice. As the student progresses into the subject-specific materials, each section raises significant questions about the underlying reliability of each discipline but also demonstrate an analytical framework to serve as a template for future encounters with unfamiliar disciplines.

There is a set of 127 PowerPoint slides available upon adoption of this book. Click here to view a sample presentation. If you are a professor using this book for a course, please contact Beth Hall at bhall@cap-press.com to request your slides.


| Permalink


If anyone has any questions about the text, please comment or email me at andrew.jurs (at) drake.edu and I'd be happy to provide more details.

Posted by: Andrew Jurs | Jul 12, 2019 9:20:35 AM

Based on my experience in the post-Serial mostly-Undisclosed community, I have become motivated to take the LSAT and hopefully, get myself into a decent law school. I hope some day in the not terribly distant future, I'll be studying from such a textbook.

Thank you Colin for everything and this blog, for one.

Posted by: Paul | Jul 20, 2019 5:54:32 PM

I'm not sure where else to make the comment, so delete this one here if needed, but the rules of evidence seemed AMAZINGLY loose in the most recent Keith Davis, Jr. trial and I'm wondering what background and precedent could have justified that. (Besides just judicial discretion and an "anything goes" attitude by judge.) I'm happy to point to specifics but the most recent episodes of Undisclosed covered them all - although not in much depth.

Posted by: Tony | Jul 29, 2019 10:45:19 AM

Post a comment